Station #5: Wall Street CONTEXT Wall Street is a 1987 American drama that tells the story of Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen), a young stockbroker who becomes involved with Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas), a wealthy, unscrupulous corporate raider. The film has come to be seen as the archetypalportrayal of capitalism and its excesses, with Gekko advocating that “greed, for lack of a better word, is good.”
Before watching the clip, consider this passage from an article recently published in Vanity Fair magazine:
“The upper one-percent of Americans take in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top one-percent control 40-percent . . . The most visible centers of these crimes against the population are Wall Street and the financial industry. Although there are still many honest bankers, some seem to regard banking and trading as a license to steal. Outrageous acts are committed and go unpunished . . . Yes, monetary rewards are appropriate for those who have been successful. But modesty and humility, particularly when you are in power, ruling over the working class, are virtuous. It is inarguably unbecoming that those who fight most against social welfare are those most devoted to their own welfare.”
In this scene, Bud is betrayed by Gordon. Gordon purchased a company, telling Bud he intends to revamp it and make its workforce thrive. But Gordon really wanted to destroy the company, and its labor force. In this scene, Gordon makes an argument as to why destroying the company, and dumping its labor force, was necessary and “right.”
Play the short video clips below. In your pamphlet, take informal notes (what Gordon says, as his argument unfolds). Especially consider Gordon’s statements regarding money as “an illusion” and its value “a perception.”
Click here for the first clip. Click here for the second clip.
Once the clips are over, filter your conclusions through the Marxist Tenets.What statements, motifs (recurring images, dialogue, symbols, or idea), and themesimmediately strike you as memorable or exigent (emotionally impactful)? Consider what meaning are we supposed to make out of Gordon’s logic, and what a Marxist critic should address in analyzing Gordon’s dialogue. (They are, after all, archetypes intended to personify, and thus illustrate, Marxist ideology.)
CONTEXT
Wall Street is a 1987 American drama that tells the story of Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen), a young stockbroker who becomes involved with Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas), a wealthy, unscrupulous corporate raider. The film has come to be seen as the archetypalportrayal of capitalism and its excesses, with Gekko advocating that “greed, for lack of a better word, is good.”
Before watching the clip, consider this passage from an article recently published in Vanity Fair magazine:
“The upper one-percent of Americans take in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top one-percent control 40-percent . . . The most visible centers of these crimes against the population are Wall Street and the financial industry. Although there are still many honest bankers, some seem to regard banking and trading as a license to steal. Outrageous acts are committed and go unpunished . . . Yes, monetary rewards are appropriate for those who have been successful. But modesty and humility, particularly when you are in power, ruling over the working class, are virtuous. It is inarguably unbecoming that those who fight most against social welfare are those most devoted to their own welfare.”
In this scene, Bud is betrayed by Gordon. Gordon purchased a company, telling Bud he intends to revamp it and make its workforce thrive. But Gordon really wanted to destroy the company, and its labor force. In this scene, Gordon makes an argument as to why destroying the company, and dumping its labor force, was necessary and “right.”
Play the short video clips below. In your pamphlet, take informal notes (what Gordon says, as his argument unfolds). Especially consider Gordon’s statements regarding money as “an illusion” and its value “a perception.”
Click here for the first clip. Click here for the second clip.
Once the clips are over, filter your conclusions through the Marxist Tenets.What statements, motifs (recurring images, dialogue, symbols, or idea), and themes immediately strike you as memorable or exigent (emotionally impactful)? Consider what meaning are we supposed to make out of Gordon’s logic, and what a Marxist critic should address in analyzing Gordon’s dialogue. (They are, after all, archetypes intended to personify, and thus illustrate, Marxist ideology.)